Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    February 25, 2012 9:30am-10:00am PST

9:30 am
beautifully, the officers that participated, and one of our dispatchers, they kept saying that it is how comfortable it makes you feel. every single officer, it was not difficult. they wanted to do this. that is something that truly touched my heart. all of us have been there. we have our own coming out stories and we all identify with kids. nobody wants to see a kid having to go through some of the stuff that we went through. we wanted to be there for them. i could not be prouder of this group of officers. they truly are amazing. >> we are going to end the past -- the press conference now. everybody will remain available for questions. thank you. [applause]
9:31 am
captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- supervisor avalos: good morning. welcome to the transportation plans and authority -- transportation authority plans and program committee. please call item no. 1, roll call. >> item #one. [calls roll] we have a quorum. supervisor avalos: thank you. please call item no. 2. >> approving the minutes of the january 10 meeting. this is an action item.
9:32 am
supervisor avalos: any public comment on item number two? seeing no one, we will -- we will close public comment. the motion to approve, we will take that without objection. >> item #3, citizens of advisory committee report. this is an information item. supervisor avalos: good morning. is there a member of the supervisor -- of the advisory committee? oh. >> good morning. excuse me. good morning, commissioners. my name is joseph flanagan. i am the vice chair of the citizens advisory committee.
9:33 am
i will be providing the cac chair's report today, since the chair was unable to attend this meeting. and item number six of your agenda was considered by the cac in its january 25, 2012 meeting. the cac passed this item and discuss this item regarding the due process of the community outreach and focus on two themes. one, the traffic planning
9:34 am
program, and two, what will happen -- traffic planning program and what will happen to the park -- projects in the pipeline. two, from the current length of 36 months to 48 months, potentially to 24 months, how does the sf mta plan to maintain accurate community process? in the next item, number eight on your agenda, as considered by the cac, we pass this item unanimously. this item is focused on the evaluation of the performance process for the funds before and
9:35 am
after a vacation of the project, with the flexibility of the tfta funds for possible use in new projects. that concludes my report. i would be happy to answer questions. supervisor avalos: thank you, vice chair planning and. just a question on your statement on item number six. you talked about going forward on traffic calming, the question over projects in the pipeline, did you get a response? did you have a remaining question?
9:36 am
it is one that we can ask, as it is presented today. with no other questions from the committee, we can go on to public comment. any member of the public that would like to comment on item number three? thank you. madam clerk, item no. 4. >> item #4. recommend appointment of one member to the citizens advisory committee. this is an action item. >> [inaudible] with authority. by way of background, the authority has 11 member committee. each member serves a two year term. the authority board appoints the members. neither the staff nor the citizens advisory committee makes recommendations on
9:37 am
appointments. you can see a list of folks on the advisory committee. to qualify for appointment to the citizens advisory committee, you must be a san francisco resident and you must speak to this committee about your interest in qualifications. we currently have one vacancy that is the result of the term expiration of mr. peter cannon. he is interested in being reappointed and he is here today. with that, i can take questions. >> thank you very much. please come forward. -- supervisor avalos: thank you very much. please come forward. >> my name is peter cannon. i have served on the citizens advisory committee for the last four years.
9:38 am
i have served with the asset mta, traveling by bicycle and muni every day. i feel that with my experience, i can continue to be an effective member of the committee. i would be happy to answer any questions you might have. supervisor avalos: colleagues, comments or questions? ok, thank you for your service and commitment to transit. we will take the matter up. thank you. we can open this item up for public comment. if anyone in the public would like to comment, please come forward. >> good morning, directors. i am with the san francisco
9:39 am
bicycle coalition. in a couple of were the heartfelt support. i cannot think of anyone who is more qualified to be on this body. on behalf of the bicycle collision, i hope you will return him to this seat. thank you. >> commissioners, my name is francisco dicostra. the cac who plays a very important role. i see candidates coming year, and you are approving them arbitrarily, even though you get comments from entities who are just working with the san francisco county transportation authority to push their agenda.
9:40 am
the coalition is like a political action committee. they take monies from their membership and push an agenda. it is their prerogative. you, board of supervisors, who sit as a commission, must pay attention to what is really happening in our city. whether it is the $700 million that was spent on the light rail, the future of the central subway, but is really happening with high-speed rail. so, in view of such types of projects that need a different type of experience, i have
9:41 am
suggested and others have suggested that we need a better caliber of candidates. we have some, like candidates to have represented the same sector forever. we need infusion of new blood to make progress. thank you very much. supervisor avalos: thank you. if there are no other members of the public to comment, we will close public comment. we actually have another candidate who is here. my apologies. introduce yourself, please. >> hello, mr. chairman and members of the community. i am a strong supporter of public transit. muni is my primary way around the city.
9:42 am
this coming thursday, i will be attending the next central subway community advisory group meeting. for over one year i have been coordinating with the market street railway preservation partners. as many of you know, being a docent in the downtown area has given me insight into what i believe is the cause, but also for partial solutions, saving muni millions of dollars each year. for example, tourists have the areas where approximately 1 dozen mines pass through. so that buses do not have to wait behind left turning cars. as a software engineer by trade,
9:43 am
i am used to making complex decisions in compromises based on data. i think it would make me an excellent candidate member of the citizens advisory committee. thank you for the opportunity to serve the city and county of san francisco. supervisor avalos: thank you very much. is this your first time applying? >> yes, it is. supervisor avalos: i am sorry, i did not catch your name again. >> paul lukas. supervisor avalos: colleagues, we have before us several members who are interested in the citizens advisory committee. i know that i received an e-mail from supervisor wiener about supporting canon's reappointment to the commission in the
9:44 am
district that the supervisor service in. is that correct? so, more or less? yes. so, colleagues, we have this item before us. any motions? commissioner calling? >> i would also like to put a motion on the floor -- supervisor cohen: i would like to put the motion on the floor to support greg doxes for this position. supervisor avalos: is there a second on the motion? supervisor olague: second. supervisor avalos: any other motion? >> can i question something -- this is district 8c? >> there are tests -- technically not district seat,
9:45 am
but diversity is one of the criteria that we look at through geographic equity. there is one member from each district, with the exception of district 8, at this time. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor farrell: i would say that, given that, i will put the motion forward for this seat. let me say that it is because of the district 8 connection. i am new to this policy, but it makes sense in that think it is something that we should support. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor olague: i think that
9:46 am
some of the things i am concerned about is the lack of diversity on this committee. i think that a lot of the issue that we here at this level, which concern transportation, has a heavy impact on communities, particularly communities of color. to that end, i am in support of commissioner cohen's motion. i think that we really need to think about having a more representative body to represent the city. i think that the impacts are pretty significant. i just wanted to put that out there. supervisor avalos: colleagues, let's go ahead and do a wrote -- roll-call vote on the motion. can we do that? director moskowitz?
9:47 am
>> first of all, congratulations on your appointment to the committee. a quick clarification. as the chief deputy said, the committee over a number of years sought to get to a district by district representation pattern, because it was felt that it was important to have at least one person from each district. in addition to that, i wanted to clarify and review the concerns for what the commissioner has put on the table, which is something we have been pursuing for years. that all of these appointments are staggered. if you look at the chart on page 37 of your packet, you will see that there are opportunities coming out for appointments or reappointment, throughout 2012.
9:48 am
there are two in july and one in december. in fact, they are distributed amongst several different districts. 10, 1, 4, 5, and so on. there are several opportunities per year to have this discussion. you do have a detailed representation at the bottom of the chart, on page 37. the other thing that i should clarify is, because i have been asking myself this question, what is the challenge on this committee member of this is a committee that gets to do a lot of work. late meetings that go three hours, at least, every month.
9:49 am
it is hard to find people who are available to attend the meetings. you would only missed two meetings per year and otherwise would be automatically of the committee. it is a dedicated group of people. supervisor olague: i am not saying that people of a certain community cannot adequately represent the impacts, but i believe that there are plenty of people who are off of a diverse background that have the skills and commitment to fulfill the requirement. the skills and requirements for cup -- that the role requires.
9:50 am
supervisor avalos: i have known greg and have worked for him -- with him for a number of years. i think he would make a great member of the committee. i also feel that it is important that we look at what the tradition has been in terms of having district seat on the cac. to me, that is an important consideration. this committee has often deferred to the supervisor. there was a request for the supervisor to continue with the appointment of the community member. that is just one of the many decisions that we make here as a body. but we can have a roll call that
9:51 am
goes. commissioner cohne: n. commissioner cohen: thank you. i am not sure this is how you intended, but i feel like your comments are almost justification as to why we should not support him, and i would disagree respectfully with what you pointed out. i believe if we have several different appointments coming up, there will be another opportunity for peter tannen. what i am saying is we have an opportunity to make a decision today. why wait until june? why wait until june when the district can see it is expired. we have an opportunity today before us to make an incremental
9:52 am
change that will, i believe, have a lasting impact on the southeast part of the city. thank you. commissioner avalos: madam clerk, if we could have a roll call. [calling roll] kim absent. olague, aye. two ayes. so that falls down the middle. commissioner avalos: the motion fails. a motion from commissioner farrell. can i second the motion? i will second the motion. if we could have uppea roll call
9:53 am
vote. avaolos aye. cohen aye. farrell aye. olague aye. item passes. commissioner avalos: motion passes. >> transportation sustainability program proposal index steps information item. >> chair avalos, in commissioners, i am pleased to and ferment -- present the information on the sustainability program along with our partners of the planning department and the mayor's office of economic and workforce elements. in particular chief of staff. as you may recall, authority began this work to try to it
9:54 am
explore alternatives to the sequeua implementation measure many years ago. -- ceqa implementation measurement years ago to try to better align the city kids petition with the city in merman to review policies. today we're pleased to bring you this update in proposal for a programmatic approach called the transportation sustainability program. it will have reflected a truly collaborative effort on the part of four agencies. we're extremely grateful to the planning department staff for their partnership to sfmta staff, including their leafbiad on this effort, who are here today. i would be remiss if i did not appreciate reach a heigachel hyd
9:55 am
others. i will turn this presentation over to alicia, and you should have some slides at your desk. >> good morning, commissioners. felicialicia jonbaptist. this is been a long-plant effort between the four offices. the program itself is innovative in that it relates to the develop a process, which are currently distinct and separate from the environmental review process and the impact fees in such a way to allow for the city to comprehensively fund assets of systematic transportation network improvements that better meet our transit first and other mode tight -- multi-modal
9:56 am
transportation components. we have three components. first is the way we conduct impact analysis under ceqa, six -- specifically by using automobile as a metric. the second is the establishment of a city-wide transportation ability feet. the third is completion of an environment of had report, which would study the cumulative impact of 20 years of projected development activity on the transportation system as whole and the effects of a variety of transportation affect on that growth. this effort was initiated some time ago at request of the transportation authority board at that time. the commissioners recognized the difference between the way we were conducting transportation
9:57 am
impact analysis, and the city's goals in terms of supporting transit first and other multi molecule transgendered petition abilities -- multi-modal transportation abilities. in 2009 the city formed an interagency committee comprised of the agencies mentioned, and at that time we commissioned a study to understand the impact of development on the transportation system as a whole and to establish a nexus between those two. in 2010 transportation staff spent a great deal of time modeling the effects of growth coming in through that effort we were able to a dignified the highest impact, most cost- effective ways of addressing the impact from growth over time. in 2011 we put those pieces together, the nexus study, and
9:58 am
the modeling to produce a comprehensive feet and expenditure program, and in 2012 we are completing the drafting of an ordinance that would enable these changes. coming back to the purpose again, all of this is in service of better meeting the transportation-first policies. it is a way of modifying the way that we do business in the city, so that we can better meet the goals. getting into the specifics of each of the components of the program, the change to ceqa methodology will focus on looking at transit delay in transit crowding at the methods result for when we're doing tram -- transportation impact analysis. by focusing on zero thruput at a specific intersection, we can better focus litigation's on the projects, which ultimately serve
9:59 am
transit. we find using l.o.ws.l today can be in feasible and in contradiction to our broader priorities and policies. many of these are long-standing. 40 years ago it was adopted. what we find is as we are solving for speed of automobile throughput, litigation may be to expand roadway capacity, adelaide of traffic coming and that can be in contradiction to our other goals. for example, establishing a safe and secure biked network or insuring pedestrian safety. -- bike network or insuring pedestrian safety. we also find the last project that comes in that tips the scale from accessible to an acceptable in terms of how quickly the automobiles are moving through the area and of being

54 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on